Wednesday, October 24, 2012 4:42:42 PMhg: its a good thing because it will be less about that aincient business era full of scammers money lovers, rip off artists, and more about the current era.. the sharing of ideas

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 4:36:11 PMHolyGod: so if ads are everywhere and nobody likes them, and people get a chance to remove them, they will jump at it and remove them. ads, as they are today, dont have a good future. no doubt the internet will change when everyone is blocking ads.. but you say it will be worse.. and i think it will be better. imho its stupid to watch ads being forced on you, and act like its their right to do so to you, when you dont like them.. especially when there are simple ways to prevent them from ever reaching your eyes

"HolyGod: so does that mean you're not going to put up a blog to ask what people think is the most annoying thing on the internet?"

Don't need to. I don't dispute that the answer is ads. Just like the most annoying thing about TV is ads. Just like the most annoying thing about newspapers is ads. Just like the most annoying thing about radio is ads. Just like the most annoying thing about magazines is ads.

I have DVR and OnDemand, so I rarely see a TV ad. However most people still see the ads. If everyone used DVR and skipped the ads then advertisers would stop advertising. If advertisers stopped paying stations they couldn't pay networks who in turn couldn't pay show developers who then couldn't pay actors, writers, stylists, reporters, etc. Free TV would disappear. If you wanted to watch CBS or NBC you'd have to pay for it like it was HBO.

The Internet as we know it would not exist without ads, even if they annoy you.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:40:45 PMholyGod: i'm all for the pull method, meaning if i want to see an ad, i'll go to look for it, but the push method, where it's everywhere you look, is far too annoying. Why not write up a blog, to see what annoys people the most on the internet. I would not be surprised if 'ads' is the top or near the top of the list (perhaps under the negativity of people, hate, etc)

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:34:33 PMHolyGod: i was talking about your bias against those who trust in God.

But so you, and millions others, know how the internet works. But you'll have a hard time selling your fear story to someone who'se witnessed the internet in it's pre-ad-clogged form. yes, it grew and grew because people shared information. Get rid of the ads, and it will continue to grow. Sure some people will pout because they can't make money like they used to, but that means they were just in it for the money, and that's their problem for making that flawed choice.

It isn't a bias. I do this s.hit for a living. I know how the internet works. Obviously you don't.

It is fine if adblock works for you. It works for lots of people. However if everyone used it the advertisers would leave and free sites would shut down and all would go to a pay model. The only sites that would be left would be ecommerce and little blogs.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 1:31:17 PMHolyGod: again, i'll restate: plenty of web sites can be run for free. I'm sure when the time comes, web site owners will figure out what to do. Sure a lot of the big players will drop out or go to a pay model, but where one falls another will rise, where one charges another will provide information for free

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:05:15 AMI have no stake in the actual discussion but..

HolyGod, Tumblr! The actual site itself has no discernible advertising, at least none placed by Tumblr itself. The only advertising I've ever seen is posted by individual bloggers themselves, not the site 8]

(and before you say it, the one thing that says 'advertising' on the right of the homepage is a tag, it actually goes to a blog dedicated to advertising lol)

I know you believe in god, so I don't actually expect you to be rational about anything. However you are completely out of your depth and out of your mind.

"People will still offer something on the internet, that's what the internet is based on, the sharing of information."

No. No it isn't. It is about making money. The internet is a full time job. Most sites you visit, including this one, have full time staffs running them. You think those people are going to just altrusistically run them for nothing if ad revenue goes away?

You think the internet is about sharing information because you are looking at the user on reddit or youtube or facebook readily sharing for free. What you don't take into account is that it takes hundreds, if not thousands of people to run those sites and without ad revenue those sites don't exist.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:38:32 PMuunxx: In the early 90s there were NO ads at all, and web sites thrived. I still remember seeing the first rectangle picture that people said was a 'banner ad', it was a depressing day. If everyone uses adblock plus and no ad companies are getting any revenue, they'll get the message (get lost!). People will still offer something on the internet, that's what the internet is based on, the sharing of information. Ads have no part in that. Ads main driving force is business/sales/greed, such as 'hey, i'm going to take advantage of this sharing of information to make a profit off of it'. *BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ* wrong idea bub. The business era was in the past, this is the information age.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:15:24 PMpatchgrabber - actually that isn't true. They don't sell your data to third party marketing companies. They only allow companies to target Facebook advertisements based on users data. However, they aren't able to see who they are advertising to, or take that data away from Facebook.

So in essence, yes you get Facebook for free so that people can target advertisements to you. It really isn't that bad...

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:07:19 PMTheGuySmiley: paradoxically without ads there would be mostly ads left on the internet, that means commercial websites that try to sell a product. Other than that there would be a few hobbyist websites and the rest would be gone. Running of any service costs money and running of big service costs lots of money, there is nothing for free.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 1:39:20 PMHolyGod: plenty of web sites can be run for free. I'm sure when the time comes, web site owners will figure out what to do. Sure a lot of the big players will drop out or go to a pay model, but where one falls another will rise, where one charges, a freedom fighter will rise. Because the reality is very few people are going to pay to visit a web site, and very few people like ads